MyNation KnowledgeBase

Landmark Judgments and Articles on Law

Register to Download

Temporary injunction in custody case


Court No. – 5    Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. – 2868 of 2012

Petitioner :- Smt. Divya Kaur Sabharwal (U/A 227)

Respondent :- Additional Principal Judge Family Court Lucknow

Petitioner Counsel :- Salil Kumar Srivastava
Respondent Counsel :- Manish Kumar

Hon’ble Ritu Raj Awasthi,J.
Notice on behalf of opposite party no.1 has been accepted by Manish Kumar, Advocate.

The writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the learned court below for early disposal of the temporary injunction application filed by the petitioner on 31.01.2012 in Regular Suit No. 65 of 2011 (Smit. Divya Kaur Sabharwal Vs Manpreet Singh Sabharwal) pending in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the suit for declaration of Guradianship of minor son and for permanent injunction was filed by the mother of the minor child namely, Keerat Singh, aged about three and half years.  The Court below vide order dated 01.07.2011 had issued summon for appearance of opposite parties while entertaining the said suit.  Since then several dates have been fixed but till date the opposite parties have not put in appearance.

The grievance of the petitioner is that the opposite parties on the one hand are deliberately avoiding appearance before the court concerned and on the other hand they are indulging in illegal activity of forcibly taking custody of the child.  In this regard, on 19.06.2011 a police report has been lodged by the petitioner.

I have considered the submissions made by the  parties’ counsel.

See also  Functional convenience of a party in commercial litigations cannot be a ground to transfer case u/s 25 cpc

From the perusal of a copy of the order-sheet (Annexure-1) of the learned court below, it appears that since 01.07.2011 the said case has been adjourned on several dates on one pretext  or the other.  In case the opposite parties to the case are deliberately avoiding appearance and summons have not been served through regular process, it is for the court concerned to take decision to get the service effected  through other means.  It is to be observed that in the matter relating to Guardian and Ward Act, the Court concerned  should make all possible efforts to expedite the proceedings and make endeavour to decide the temporary injunction application at an early date.  The petitioner is hereby given liberty to move an application for early disposal of temporary injunction application before the court concerned.

With the aforesaid observations the writ petition is  disposed of.

Order Date :- 22.5.2012

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Important SC/HC Judgements on 498A IPC
Rules and Regulations of India.


CopyRight @ MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Section 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

See also  Functional convenience of a party in commercial litigations cannot be a ground to transfer case u/s 25 cpc
MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation